Lately I've been feeling like a man divided. On one hand, as regular readers will attest to, I am all about society. Cultural, technological and scientific progress is just tits, and derives directly from the fact that we've banded together in such unreasonably large and cumbersome groups. On the other hand Civilization has always been based on, shall we say, coercive conscription and that is pretty fucking evil.
There is much to be said concerning the wonderful things a large group can accomplish, but all of those things are only possible because of the most basic action of a group. Bullying. While many groups function by accumulating like-minded people, those like-minded people then have the odious duty to enforce their common beliefs upon those in their vicinity. Now this isn't always violent, and it certainly isn't always bad, but it is always oppressive. And the larger the group gets the more power they have to enforce those beliefs and the more territory they need, and so the more people come under their authority, willing or not. Now this is fucked up enough when people are being forced from their homes, but what happens when there isn't anywhere to flee?
We've talked about this before, Brian had a very insightful post about the lack of unclaimed land and what that means, but that's only part of it. It is definitely fucked up that you can't opt out of society, but it is so much more fucked up that you can't opt out of civilization. Say I don't want to be a U.S. citizen anymore. My option is to go to another country that I find more tolerable. What about people who don't find any country tolerable, and just want to strike out on their own. First you would have to go somewhere that isn't already claimed by some group or another, which as previously discussed is a troublesome prospect at best. Then you'd have to make sure whatever magical land you landed on doesn't have any resources someone would want, because then they'd come and take it, and you'd have no claim to stop them. Now sure, this has always been true to some extent, but its a relatively recent phenomena that the people coming and forcing you off your land can do so exclusively from another fucking continent. Assuming you've managed to survive in this probably barren, distant and unlikely new home, you then have to hope you didn't leave behind any reason for someone to come looking for you, lest you draw the wrong kind of attention and someone buys your land out from under you to put up a factory or a landfill or something. The U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights is quite clear that everyone has the right to a nationality, but gives no mention of those who would rather not involve themselves in such an endeavor as a nation. The entire document is framed entirely as a means of protecting the individual within the framework of the State.
The idea that someone wouldn't want to participate in society is alien to us, which kind of makes sense when you account for the fact that civilization has historically been highly interested in justifying itself as the best or only way to live, even and especially when opposed by another civilization. Everyone likes to think that they have a monopoly on awesome, and the more like-minded people you get together the more certain they become of that monopoly. All they have to do is convince the unenlightened, or show the reticent, or kill the barbarians. And those that feel lost or broken under the yoke of the Group, well these days they can either wither away in depression and obscurity, wondering why they always feel so oppressed, or they can slowly work themselves to death trying to numb themselves against a world with no regard for their personhood. I can't fault that we're not all "forced" to participate, but its pretty fucked up that they make us watch.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Monday, December 22, 2014
Jesus Christ Not Again
So, ugh, we've talked about shitty police stuff before. I can't describe how much I want to not have to do this, but I can't help it at this point. I've been trying to hold my tongue for a while here, hoping it would get better, but my hopes are often vain and counter to the impulses of human nature. So I'm just going to say it.
If you choose (and in our culture it is fucking always a choice) to go into law enforcement you need to understand that you aren't a person while you're wearing your uniform. Police officers are servants, says it right there in the oft repeated, usually disregarded motto, protect and serve. Any system of policing that values the safety and comfort of officers over the safety of absolutely all civilians, criminal and casual observer alike, is despotism. You went into a field where a certain (astronomically low) percentage of the population feels the need to kill you, don't fucking antagonize people. The role of a police force is to protect the populace and ensure that those who commit crimes against that populace are processed by the legal system arbitrated by the society. It is absolutely fucking never okay for a police officer to kill. It doesn't matter if your life is in jeopardy. It doesn't matter if you feel entitled or justified. You are not a person. You, as a police officer, are a construct manifested by our society to make sure that due process is maintained. Any law that protects you above a citizen is tyrannic, and system that allows you to kill is, at best, catastrophically unjust. Police officers are representatives of justice, as the society they serve defines it. No extra privileges, no special treatment. They are mechanisms as long as they are acting in an official capacity, and civilians the second they aren't.
If you choose (and in our culture it is fucking always a choice) to go into law enforcement you need to understand that you aren't a person while you're wearing your uniform. Police officers are servants, says it right there in the oft repeated, usually disregarded motto, protect and serve. Any system of policing that values the safety and comfort of officers over the safety of absolutely all civilians, criminal and casual observer alike, is despotism. You went into a field where a certain (astronomically low) percentage of the population feels the need to kill you, don't fucking antagonize people. The role of a police force is to protect the populace and ensure that those who commit crimes against that populace are processed by the legal system arbitrated by the society. It is absolutely fucking never okay for a police officer to kill. It doesn't matter if your life is in jeopardy. It doesn't matter if you feel entitled or justified. You are not a person. You, as a police officer, are a construct manifested by our society to make sure that due process is maintained. Any law that protects you above a citizen is tyrannic, and system that allows you to kill is, at best, catastrophically unjust. Police officers are representatives of justice, as the society they serve defines it. No extra privileges, no special treatment. They are mechanisms as long as they are acting in an official capacity, and civilians the second they aren't.
Labels:
Abuse of Power,
Anger,
Authority,
Cruelty,
Culture,
DISAPPOINTED!,
Douchebags,
Ethics,
Fail,
Failure to perform,
Fear,
Hate,
Law Enforcement,
Politics,
shitty behavior,
Social Justice,
Society
Thursday, December 11, 2014
SPAAAAAAAAACEEEEEE! I'mma Go To Space.
Brian and I have expressed our general approval of scientific progress on several occasions around these parts. One of our biggest interests along those lines is space travel. The exploration of planets outside our own, the possible revelations waiting for us in the Deep Black, its the stuff nerd boners are made of. I think most people are probably on board with us on this, space is exciting, I mean seriously, kids wanting to grow up to be astronauts is cliche` common. So why aren't we out there? Why has the biggest intellectual resource for space exploration been whittled down to a bunch of politicians grumbling at each other?
The most common excuse I've seen sited in regards to why we shouldn't bother, you know, exploring the universe, is that it isn't a worthwhile expense. There are no words to express how absolutely, fundamentally fucking wrong that is, nor am I possessed of the patience to describe how many levels this argument fucks up on. Of course, that's never stopped me from trying before and its certainly not going to stop me here.
Point 1: Ugh, Fuck You. We live in a world where economic worth is entirely the product of (usually enforced) scarcity and perceived advantage. If the powers that be wanted the money made available it would be.
Point 2: You know what? Fuck you some more. Even if we're buying into the "market factors" bullshit as a stumbling block to scientific progress, that progress is its own reward. There is no such thing as a "worthless" scientific discovery. Even the weird penis ratio studies that we keep throwing money at (but exploring the infinite bounty of space is just not worth it) tell us things about the human body, psychology, how hormones do and don't effect development. These studies are functionally one step below naval gazing but they still inform us of new things, confirm or deny old things, and lead us to further inquiry. Failure to recognize the value of scientific progress to the level that denies space exploration represents a complete failure as a modern human.
Point 3: Na uh! Lets talk about the fact of extra terrestrial life. Its out there. See the period? There is no room for argument on that subject. I'm not saying that little grey men abduct red necks for sodomy experiments. I am saying that the universe is unimaginably vast, assuming that we are unique in that universe represents a degree of hubris that ought to be terminal. Absolutely any contact with extraterrestrial life would explode the limits of modern science, open up entire new fields of inquiry on every front, and give us opportunities we can't even fully conceive of. Even if that life develops exactly as we have, that says so very much about how reality works its staggering.
Point 4: Bite Me. Let's give the nay sayers as much charity as I can bare. If the questions to be answered mean nothing. If the progress to be made is meaningless. If science for science sake is of no value to their tiny, malformed brains. Even if all of that is true, space is just fucking full of resources. There are compounds found in asteroids that can't be found anywhere on earth. There are exoplanets that rain fucking diamond, carbon arrangements that can't occur naturally on our planet. Asteroids litter our solar system just fucking lousy with raw material begging to be mined. From an economic perspective even the colossal expenditures involved in space flight can just be passed onto consumers as our fears of finite resources fade ever farther away. sure it means we can't be gutted as badly for the resources themselves, but the cost of acquisition would more than cover it if they're really insistent about being an avaricious cuntbag about it.
So next time you read a newsfeed about some senator or wrong-heaed media mouthpiece bitching about how much NASA is costing us and how worthless space programs are, take a minute to write them. Tell them what an ignorant, shortsighted shit-licker they are. I suppose you could be more politic about it than that, but I don't see the point in mincing words with the enemy.
The most common excuse I've seen sited in regards to why we shouldn't bother, you know, exploring the universe, is that it isn't a worthwhile expense. There are no words to express how absolutely, fundamentally fucking wrong that is, nor am I possessed of the patience to describe how many levels this argument fucks up on. Of course, that's never stopped me from trying before and its certainly not going to stop me here.
Point 1: Ugh, Fuck You. We live in a world where economic worth is entirely the product of (usually enforced) scarcity and perceived advantage. If the powers that be wanted the money made available it would be.
Point 2: You know what? Fuck you some more. Even if we're buying into the "market factors" bullshit as a stumbling block to scientific progress, that progress is its own reward. There is no such thing as a "worthless" scientific discovery. Even the weird penis ratio studies that we keep throwing money at (but exploring the infinite bounty of space is just not worth it) tell us things about the human body, psychology, how hormones do and don't effect development. These studies are functionally one step below naval gazing but they still inform us of new things, confirm or deny old things, and lead us to further inquiry. Failure to recognize the value of scientific progress to the level that denies space exploration represents a complete failure as a modern human.
Point 3: Na uh! Lets talk about the fact of extra terrestrial life. Its out there. See the period? There is no room for argument on that subject. I'm not saying that little grey men abduct red necks for sodomy experiments. I am saying that the universe is unimaginably vast, assuming that we are unique in that universe represents a degree of hubris that ought to be terminal. Absolutely any contact with extraterrestrial life would explode the limits of modern science, open up entire new fields of inquiry on every front, and give us opportunities we can't even fully conceive of. Even if that life develops exactly as we have, that says so very much about how reality works its staggering.
Point 4: Bite Me. Let's give the nay sayers as much charity as I can bare. If the questions to be answered mean nothing. If the progress to be made is meaningless. If science for science sake is of no value to their tiny, malformed brains. Even if all of that is true, space is just fucking full of resources. There are compounds found in asteroids that can't be found anywhere on earth. There are exoplanets that rain fucking diamond, carbon arrangements that can't occur naturally on our planet. Asteroids litter our solar system just fucking lousy with raw material begging to be mined. From an economic perspective even the colossal expenditures involved in space flight can just be passed onto consumers as our fears of finite resources fade ever farther away. sure it means we can't be gutted as badly for the resources themselves, but the cost of acquisition would more than cover it if they're really insistent about being an avaricious cuntbag about it.
So next time you read a newsfeed about some senator or wrong-heaed media mouthpiece bitching about how much NASA is costing us and how worthless space programs are, take a minute to write them. Tell them what an ignorant, shortsighted shit-licker they are. I suppose you could be more politic about it than that, but I don't see the point in mincing words with the enemy.
Monday, October 20, 2014
YKWFA: The Least Violent Way to a Man's Heart.
Not long enough ago and not far enough away my wife and I lived with her mother. Now I love my wife spectacularly. Seriously, its crazy. But she and I agree that her mother is a vile, shit-souled, solipsistic, thunder-cunt. I know, I know, this is supposed to be about something fucking awesome, not the subhuman bilge waste that spawned my lovely wife; but it follows, I promise. When she wasn't manipulating my wife or insulting me she was a terrible food snob, not in that she was overly fussy about what she ate (though she did insist that her cats ate organic gourmet lobster cat food), but in that she was bad at being a food snob. So bad in fact that it inspired me.
I once heard this woman utter the phrase "Oh, I don't really care, food is really just fuel." on the 45 minute drive to the organic farmer she bought milk and eggs from. That stopped me pretty much dead. Her hypocrisy boggled my mind, but more than that I was inspired by how wrong she was. I'm a tubby fucker, so I've always had a complex relationship to food (that link rambles a bit and is a bit nsfw but I love Ed Byrne and he makes my point well... eventually). She pushed me over the edge. After that point I loved food, no question, no hesitation. Food is fucking awesome. See, I told you we'd get there.
First, let me say, "food is fuel" is an accurate statement; "food is just fuel" is super fucking not. Food is a massively complex amalgamation of social/cultural/ethnic/religious standards and compromises layered over geological/climatic/biological limitations wrapped in what is both one of the most complex, and the most accessible, sciences and sprinkled liberally with the ecstatic neuro-biological phenomenon of flavor.
Anthropologically, food is almost frighteningly important. The production of food stuffs, the security of food resources, the social systems that arise surrounding going from seed to stomach are all fascinating, interdependent structures that are incredibly enlightening. Not to mention the wondrous cultural gestalt that happens when people from different food-cultures share food with each other. Food can tell us about people, describe ancient environments and technologies, and lubricate peace between cultures. It also has an anthropological "dark side". If you don't believe me go to Philadelphia and mention cheesesteak, hell just saying the word "baklava" in certain company can start fights.
Beyond anthropology there are advanced and novel chemical processes involved in cooking at every juncture. The process of turning light and dirt into energy and passing that energy up the food chain, the way different additions and catalysts (some in terribly minute quantities) can change the flavor, content and structure of a dish, down to the way the body processes different nutrients in different preparations. Have no desire to hunt links for every other word in this post, though I could, so here's a starter link, study up. Also, food is mighty tasty.
I could go on about this for days, the science and culture of food is one of the most beautiful, nuanced aspects of day to day life. Whether or not people think about it, what and how we eat plays a massive role in our lives top to bottom. If you take anything away from this post, let it be this; my mother-in-law is a cunt, and food is fucking amazing.
I once heard this woman utter the phrase "Oh, I don't really care, food is really just fuel." on the 45 minute drive to the organic farmer she bought milk and eggs from. That stopped me pretty much dead. Her hypocrisy boggled my mind, but more than that I was inspired by how wrong she was. I'm a tubby fucker, so I've always had a complex relationship to food (that link rambles a bit and is a bit nsfw but I love Ed Byrne and he makes my point well... eventually). She pushed me over the edge. After that point I loved food, no question, no hesitation. Food is fucking awesome. See, I told you we'd get there.
First, let me say, "food is fuel" is an accurate statement; "food is just fuel" is super fucking not. Food is a massively complex amalgamation of social/cultural/ethnic/religious standards and compromises layered over geological/climatic/biological limitations wrapped in what is both one of the most complex, and the most accessible, sciences and sprinkled liberally with the ecstatic neuro-biological phenomenon of flavor.
Anthropologically, food is almost frighteningly important. The production of food stuffs, the security of food resources, the social systems that arise surrounding going from seed to stomach are all fascinating, interdependent structures that are incredibly enlightening. Not to mention the wondrous cultural gestalt that happens when people from different food-cultures share food with each other. Food can tell us about people, describe ancient environments and technologies, and lubricate peace between cultures. It also has an anthropological "dark side". If you don't believe me go to Philadelphia and mention cheesesteak, hell just saying the word "baklava" in certain company can start fights.
Beyond anthropology there are advanced and novel chemical processes involved in cooking at every juncture. The process of turning light and dirt into energy and passing that energy up the food chain, the way different additions and catalysts (some in terribly minute quantities) can change the flavor, content and structure of a dish, down to the way the body processes different nutrients in different preparations. Have no desire to hunt links for every other word in this post, though I could, so here's a starter link, study up. Also, food is mighty tasty.
I could go on about this for days, the science and culture of food is one of the most beautiful, nuanced aspects of day to day life. Whether or not people think about it, what and how we eat plays a massive role in our lives top to bottom. If you take anything away from this post, let it be this; my mother-in-law is a cunt, and food is fucking amazing.
Thursday, October 2, 2014
They See Me Trollin'
I understand that stupid people and assholes can be amusing to watch. The commentary on their behavior can provide us with hours of laughs when filtered through the right comedic source. But we need to stop it. I know, its a hell of a sacrifice but it's important.
One of the prime examples of why this is so critical is Donald Trump. I can't speak to his intelligence, but Trump is an epic level asshole. Not just an asshole, a Troll; even if he 100% believes all the horrid shit he says, part of why he says it is to get attention. And of course we give it to him, because its horrid, so everyone feels better. Either from denouncing him and taking a moral high ground or parroting him and enjoying the second hand attention and participation in a group. I am admittedly simplifying the social dynamics here but regardless of depth, nothing good comes from encouraging these people.
This is, however, another instance where if we want to do it right we need to clarify our language. A Troll is someone who starts unnecessary shit to get attention, they are reductive, insulting and actively incendiary. They are not people who disagree with the prevailing beliefs in a discussion. Its an important distinction to make, and its very fucking difficult to make it. People like to be right, more than almost anything else, so the urge to label people who disagree with you as trolls is pretty damn strong, but I believe in you or whatever. Be a grown up, further the discussion. If the people you're talking to aren't furthering the discussion either call them on it and try to move on or go talk to someone else. Either way, we need to stop validating shitty people.
One of the prime examples of why this is so critical is Donald Trump. I can't speak to his intelligence, but Trump is an epic level asshole. Not just an asshole, a Troll; even if he 100% believes all the horrid shit he says, part of why he says it is to get attention. And of course we give it to him, because its horrid, so everyone feels better. Either from denouncing him and taking a moral high ground or parroting him and enjoying the second hand attention and participation in a group. I am admittedly simplifying the social dynamics here but regardless of depth, nothing good comes from encouraging these people.
This is, however, another instance where if we want to do it right we need to clarify our language. A Troll is someone who starts unnecessary shit to get attention, they are reductive, insulting and actively incendiary. They are not people who disagree with the prevailing beliefs in a discussion. Its an important distinction to make, and its very fucking difficult to make it. People like to be right, more than almost anything else, so the urge to label people who disagree with you as trolls is pretty damn strong, but I believe in you or whatever. Be a grown up, further the discussion. If the people you're talking to aren't furthering the discussion either call them on it and try to move on or go talk to someone else. Either way, we need to stop validating shitty people.
Labels:
DISAPPOINTED!,
Douchebags,
Fail,
Politics,
Religion,
Science,
Society,
Trolls
Friday, August 15, 2014
Evolution of Information
Dogma is a depressing topic for me. I grew up in a catholic household and as such was taught all the normal stories about Jesus and God and the like, but even then it wasn't as bad as some of the other people in our congregation since my parents also encouraged me to learn about other things which conflicted with certain church teachings. When I was about sixteen I think that my being an agnostic/atheist finally took hold, as I realized that the teachings of the church didn't make sense. I feel even more strongly about this now. As I have grown older and have gained more access to information about the world I realized that the church isn't a force for good, just for its own propagation. This isn't to say that they don't do any good, I just think that the people in charge have other priorities.
Dogma isn't a catholic specific thing. I once had a very depressing conversation with a religious fanatic type that was protesting where I went to college. He belonged to a non denominational church that believed that the bible was 100% literal truth. It wasn't depressing because he believed in god or was stupid or anything, but because when I talked to him I saw a physical change which indicated dogma taking over. We had been talking about evolution and I suggested that maybe God, being a metaphysical being and all, couldn't interact with the world in a very direct manner, and that maybe he nudged evolution in a direction that created people. I thought, at the time, that this would at the very least open him up to the idea that evolution was a possibility. He said that it made sense and we talked about it for a few minutes until I saw his face change to a stern expression and he said that it didn't match with the bible, and therefore didn't happen. This was a heartbreaking thing for me to see. I had, somewhat foolishly, thought that people could easily engage in a discussion and come to a consensus based on mutual understanding. Unfortunately, extenuating circumstances can make this very hard to accomplish.
I have a problem with organized religion for this reason. I don't care if people believe in a god or gods, but in the face of evidence contradicting them, fanatics will completely ignore it and that's a problem. This isn't a problem just in religion either. Religion was just my first experience with it. Its a big thing in America, and I am sure it happens in a lot of other places, that politicians cannot be "flip-floppers". Opponents will constantly throw this accusation around at each other as evidence of them being untrustworthy, weak willed, or both. Here's the thing though: if you have an ideology and you see evidence that shows that your beliefs; be they religious, scientific, or political, are wrong, or misguided, not adjusting your views based on that new information is wrong and very dangerous. In the political world this feeds into way more fucked up territory,where people will side against someone, completely ignoring evidence, because they are on opposite sides of the aisle. They reinforce this by creating an extreme political dogma, to which only strict adherents of, are allowed to remain in power. Those who fail to tow the party line are then continuously replaced by more and more zealous elements. Unfortunately, this radicalizing of political ideology results in a manic power struggle that forbids any kind of productivity. And when nothing gets done things can only get worse.
Not looking at evidence and making the best decisions for the citizenry, and instead "sticking to your guns" is hurting the country. This happens to both major parties and as long as we have a fear of change it will never go away. Fear of change is the ultimate reason that this behavior persists. People who invest a lot of energy into a practice don't want to feel as if the energy was wasted so they fight to make it work. But change is inevitable. Physics says so; even with information. You can fight against it, but it will always beat you in the end. Failing to adapt is the best way to ensure that your way of life/beliefs die out.
Dogma isn't a catholic specific thing. I once had a very depressing conversation with a religious fanatic type that was protesting where I went to college. He belonged to a non denominational church that believed that the bible was 100% literal truth. It wasn't depressing because he believed in god or was stupid or anything, but because when I talked to him I saw a physical change which indicated dogma taking over. We had been talking about evolution and I suggested that maybe God, being a metaphysical being and all, couldn't interact with the world in a very direct manner, and that maybe he nudged evolution in a direction that created people. I thought, at the time, that this would at the very least open him up to the idea that evolution was a possibility. He said that it made sense and we talked about it for a few minutes until I saw his face change to a stern expression and he said that it didn't match with the bible, and therefore didn't happen. This was a heartbreaking thing for me to see. I had, somewhat foolishly, thought that people could easily engage in a discussion and come to a consensus based on mutual understanding. Unfortunately, extenuating circumstances can make this very hard to accomplish.
I have a problem with organized religion for this reason. I don't care if people believe in a god or gods, but in the face of evidence contradicting them, fanatics will completely ignore it and that's a problem. This isn't a problem just in religion either. Religion was just my first experience with it. Its a big thing in America, and I am sure it happens in a lot of other places, that politicians cannot be "flip-floppers". Opponents will constantly throw this accusation around at each other as evidence of them being untrustworthy, weak willed, or both. Here's the thing though: if you have an ideology and you see evidence that shows that your beliefs; be they religious, scientific, or political, are wrong, or misguided, not adjusting your views based on that new information is wrong and very dangerous. In the political world this feeds into way more fucked up territory,where people will side against someone, completely ignoring evidence, because they are on opposite sides of the aisle. They reinforce this by creating an extreme political dogma, to which only strict adherents of, are allowed to remain in power. Those who fail to tow the party line are then continuously replaced by more and more zealous elements. Unfortunately, this radicalizing of political ideology results in a manic power struggle that forbids any kind of productivity. And when nothing gets done things can only get worse.
Not looking at evidence and making the best decisions for the citizenry, and instead "sticking to your guns" is hurting the country. This happens to both major parties and as long as we have a fear of change it will never go away. Fear of change is the ultimate reason that this behavior persists. People who invest a lot of energy into a practice don't want to feel as if the energy was wasted so they fight to make it work. But change is inevitable. Physics says so; even with information. You can fight against it, but it will always beat you in the end. Failing to adapt is the best way to ensure that your way of life/beliefs die out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)